Issue 6

THE STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF AMHERST COLLEGE SINCE 1868

THE AMHERST

STUDENT

Like us on Facebook! @AmherstStudent

VOLUME CXLIX, ISSUE 6 l WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2019

AMHERSTSTUDENT.COM

High-Profile Harvard Ruling Affirmed by College Administration Seoyeon Kim ’21 Managing Arts & Living Editor

Photo courtesy of Emma Swislow ‘20

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg spoke in conversation with President Biddy Martin in a highly anticpated event on Oct. 3. Nearly 1,600 community members attended the event in Coolidge Cage.

RBG Calls Current Era an “Aberration” Natalie De Rosa ’21 Managing News Editor

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg addressed the role of the Court, workplace discrimination and the current political period — “an aberration,” she said — in a conversation with President Biddy Martin on Thursday, Oct. 3. The event, which was highly promoted and took place in Coolidge Cage, drew nearly 1,600 audience members from the college and Amherst community.

Ginsburg, the oldest justice on the Court, was appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1993. A Brooklyn native, she was the first in her family to attend college. After graduating from Cornell University and Columbia Law School, she worked as a lawyer, advocating for gender equality and women’s rights and winning multiple cases in front of the Supreme Court.

Since her tenure on the Court, she has faced a number of health issues,

including three instances of cancer, but received a heavy outpouring of support for her commitment to the Court despite these concerns. A pop culture icon, she has been dubbed “The Notorious RBG,” in reference to the late rapper The Notorious B.I.G., and is the subject of last year’s lauded documentary “RBG” and the feature film “On the Basis of Sex.” Andrew Nussbaum ’85, chair of the Board of Trustees and a former law clerk for Ginsburg, opened the event with a brief biography of the Supreme Court justice, noting that audience members may already know a lot about her from “read[ing] one of the many books about Justice Ginsburg, or see[ing] her portrayed on Saturday Night Live.”

Following the introduction, the Amherst College Choral Society sang a piece from one of Ginsburg’s favorite operas before handing the stage back to Martin, who began by asking Ginsburg about the origins of

her love for opera. Ginsburg recalled that composer Dean Dixon used to travel across high schools to increase exposure of opera to youth in the U.S. Ever since then, she has been hooked.

“Sometimes I’m so consumed by my work … but when I go to the opera, all the briefs and opinions are put on the high shelf and I just enjoy the glorious music,” Ginsburg said.

Martin next asked Ginsburg about learning the value of writing during her undergraduate career at Cornell. After describing one of her professors who was particularly interested in the different shapes of writing and the ways in which they pushed her thinking — what Martin commented sounded like “a good education” — Ginsburg conceded that “some things were not right about Cornell in those days.” Back then, the ratio of male to female students was four to one.

“This made it a favorite place to send daughters because if you

couldn’t find your man at Cornell, you were hopeless,” she joked.

Drawing on Ginsburg’s years growing up during the Holocaust and World War II, as well as her college years’ overlap with the rise of the infamous communist-accuser Sen. Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s, Martin pivoted the conversation to discuss the role of free speech in today’s political climate.

Ginsburg’s constitutional law professor wanted her to see that there was something “really wrong” with McCarthyism, Ginsburg said. “We have the right to think, speak and write as we please and not as Big Brother government says is the right way to think, speak and write,” she said.

Inspired by her professor, “I had the idea that being a lawyer was a nifty thing to do,” Ginsburg added, citing that she anticipated advocating

Continued on page 3

Last week, the college welcomed the district court’s ruling in a highly-anticipated case, which decided that Harvard does not discriminate against Asian-American applicants in its admissions process and that race-conscious admissions is constitutional. The decision, announced on Oct. 1, comes nearly five years after the group Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) filed a complaint against Harvard in 2014.

SFFA alleged that Harvard violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on four counts: by intentionally discriminating against Asian Americans, by using racial balancing, by using race as a determining factor when considering who to admit and by using race-conscious admissions without first exhausting race-neutral alternatives. Judge Allison Burroughs’ ruling cleared the university of all four claims, citing the importance of racial diversity in her 130-page decision.

The original lawsuit pointed to data which shows, according to SFFA, that Asian-American applicants are consistently ranked lower on “personality,” hurting their chances of admission, despite academic and extracurricular achievements. Early on in the case, Amherst submitted a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Harvard.

Continued on page 5

News Sept. 30, 2019 – Oct. 6, 2019

>>Sept. 30, 2019 9:29 a.m., Jenkins Dormitory A speaker was stolen from a room in a residence hall.

12:47 p.m., Jenkins Dormitory A keg was located in a student’s room without proper permitting.

3:38 p.m., Morris Pratt Dormitory An exit sign was broken off of the ceiling.

2:26 p.m., Stearns Dormitory An officer responded to an alarm and found it was caused by cigarette smoke.

12:52 p.m., Service Building An individual used a spoofing number to create a prank call between two people.

No further issues occurred.

>>Oct. 6, 2019 12:29 a.m., Lipton House An officer observed party policy violations including alcohol at a registered party.

11:28 p.m., Marsh House Amherst Fire Department and officers responded to a fire alarm and found it was

Department of Biology

>>Oct. 3, 2019 12:30 a.m., Greenway Building B Officers responded to an alarm and found no smoke or fire.

>>Oct. 4, 2019 11:12 a.m., LeFrak Gymnasium An officer responded to an alarm and found it was set off accidentally by contractors.

>>Oct. 2, 2019 8:52 p.m., Valentine Dormitory Officers responded to a report of loud music and yelling. A group was dispersed.

Thoughts on Theses

caused by cooking smoke.

>>Oct. 1, 2019 10:52 a.m., Hills Lot Vehicles were blocking the flow of traffic in a lot. They were issued citations.

3:17 p.m., Campus Grounds An individual attempted to take money from a student through a phone scam.

Derek Schneider

1:00 a.m., Jenkins Dormitory AFD and officers responded to an alarm and found it was caused by humidity.

1:41 a.m., Hitchcock Dormitory An officer observed party policy violations including alcohol upon completion of a registered party.

1:49 a.m., Mayo Smith Dormitory An officer observed a number of party policy violations, including alcohol, upon completion of a registered party.

Derek Schneider is a senior biology major writing a thesis on speciation in lycium australe. His advisor is Professor of Biology and Environmental Studies Jill Miller.

Q: What is your thesis about?

A: My thesis is about investigating speciation in plants. My lab focuses on a species of plant called lyceum australe. It grows in Australia, as the name suggests. Some previous theses in my lab have noted some significant differences across its range, and there’s some specimen that have purple flowers, some that have white flowers. Some have one type of sexual system, which means their flowers are either male or female, while others have a system in which there are either female or hermaphroditic flowers. These are pretty big differences we’ve been noting. There is also some geographic distribution to these differences, and my thesis is evaluating the types of plants and the areas where they overlap and investigating whether [the plants] can reproduce with each other and asking if there is a genetic basis for calling them different species or not.

Q: Are there previous students who have been working on this same plant?

A: A couple years ago, there was one thesis student who started this investigation by looking across the plant’s entire distribution. She found these differences across its range. I began working on this problem last semester. My advisor was on sabbatical in Australia last fall, and she returned in the spring after visiting two areas where these plants overlap, and I started looking into the the data she discovered while on sabbatical.

Q: What is a typical day working in the lab like for you?

A: I don’t have any one typical day but what I really like about my lab work

is that I have a really good mix of organismal work and also traditional bench work. A lot of what my advisor brought back from Australia was seeds. Over the summer I planted a bunch of those seeds in the greenhouse, and they’ve been germinating.

I’ve been measuring [the plants] for some traits. I spend a lot of time in the greenhouse with plants but I also do a lot of DNA work in the lab on the bench. That means doing a lot of pipetting and doing a lot of PCR — polymerase chain reaction, a method for copying small segments of DNA.

on continuing to research in the future?

A: I think that I should have an answer to the most fundamental research questions such as whether these are two different species or not.

I think I should have some good ideas about the answer to that question by the end of my thesis. As with any research project, there will be future directions for other researchers to go and there may be questions that inspire a future thesis student. But I should hopefully be able to answer my questions.

Q: What has been your favorite part of the process so far?

A: I think a lot of what I enjoy is just thinking about the project in general and trying to figure out where I want to take it. There are potentially a lot of different directions to go. I’ve found times where through what I’ve been reading and just talking with my advisor I end up with this experience where I’m just thinking about what I want to do and imagining all of the possible routes I can take with my project.

Q: What has been the most rewarding part of the process?

A: It’s been really fun to see my plants germinate. I planted almost 2,600 of them, and I’m seeing a lot of success in this process. It was actually a lot of work getting them all planted and stuff, and finally seeing them sprout is very rewarding. It’s also been rewarding to start with a ton of broad questions and ideas for my investigation and actually being able to go and do these experiments and find the answers.

Q: What has been the hardest part of the process so far?

A: I’ve been setting up a pretty intensive method of sequencing for the past few months now and it’s been a lot of work to get it together. It’s not exactly a traditional type of sequencing. It requires a lot of DNA and a lot of testing is required before the company will accept it for processing, so that’s been a lot of work.

Q: Do you have any advice for other thesis writers?

A: I would say if you’re thinking about writing a thesis, you should definitely do it. Talk to potential advisors that you’re interested in working with and seeing what their programs are and how you could potentially fall into their research and how you can help them. If you’re scared that it’s a lot of work, if you’re really interested in performing research and exploring a subject, go ahead and do it.

Q: Do you think you’re going to finish your project at the end of the year or is this something you plan

—Alexi Lee ’22 and Jake Shapiro ’22

News 3

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

Unearthing the Archives: Exploring Student Engagement Shawna Chen ’20 Editor-in-Chief Earlier this semester, college rankings for 2020 came out in a number of publications, most publicly in the U.S. News & World Report and The Wall Street Journal. Unsurprisingly, Amherst College secured top spots on both lists: #2 on the former’s rankings of liberal arts colleges and #20 for the latter’s list, which includes universities. On outcomes, the college ranks particularly well, with an average salary of $60,333 10 years after enrolling, according to the Journal. U.S. News & World Report also placed the college at #12 in best undergraduate teaching and #3 in best value schools.

Notably, the college’s ranking on engagement, a metric used by the Journal in its methodology, is on the lower side when compared to similar colleges and universities. On engagement, which the Journal says is based on “how connected students feel to their school, each other and the outside world,” the college is grouped in the #501-600 rankings. Indeed, when asked if students would choose the college again if they started over, survey results showed a 7.9 on a scale of zero to 10. Harvard students, in

contrast, reported a 9.2 on the same question. Another survey question, which asked, “Does your college provide an environment where you feel you are surrounded by exceptional students who inspire and motivate you?”, garnered a 7.5 on the 10-point scale. The same question received an 8.2 from students at Williams, which also received a #501-600 ranking on student engagement.

To many, this ranking on student engagement is not surprising. Anxiety, stress and depression are consistently the highest-ranking concerns among students who visit the Counseling Center. Belonging — or lack thereof — is also a known issue at the college.

Students often refer to shadow Amherst — students that aren’t visibly known or recognized on campus — as well as the Amherst awkward — an avoidance of eye contact and hellos — in their interactions on campus. Creating a stronger sense of community and belonging, in fact, is listed as one of the priorities of the capital campaign.

But feelings of lack of belonging and engagement are exacerbated by “[t]he high value placed on achievement [at Amherst that] contributes to impostor syndrome, perfectionism

and the need to ‘perform’ success,” as stated in the strategic plan for belonging, developed by the Belonging Committee and released to the community last year.

The report detailed various initiatives that could help alleviate this tension — including increasing community engagement and “ownership” through the creation of shared experiences such as campus rituals and student-led projects focused on particular Amherst issues — but not before detailing a “problem statement” that emphasized mental health issues and social inequities within the student experience.

According to the American College Health Association’s 2016 National College Health Assessment, 30 percent of Amherst students reported feeling “very lonely” in the two weeks before the survey was conducted, compared to 27 percent of the national college reference group.

The disparity widened on another question that identified students who reported feeling “very lonely” within the last year: 72 percent of Amherst students versus 61 percent nationally. Across all years at Amherst, more than half of students reported feeling exhausted, not from physical activity.

The assessment showed that feeling

exhausted and overwhelmed “by all you had to do” is actually commonplace and more likely to occur than not.

Findings from the belonging report further made clear that “students who hold oppressed identities or come from disadvantaged backgrounds struggle more with all mental health concerns, including loneliness, isolation and social disconnection.” Students of color reported higher rates of loneliness within the two weeks before the survey compared to white students, and more first-generation students reported loneliness within the two weeks before the survey than did non-first-generation students.

The “painful reality,” the report continued, is that students of color and white students do not have the same Amherst experience. Students of color may arrive at the college excited about the “advertised diversity” commonly seen on the college website and in promotional materials, but end up disappointed by the campus climate, often feeling as if they were brought to Amherst to “satisfy the ideal of diversity, rather than for the deeper value that they bring to the community as individuals.” In addition to facing microaggressions and

instances of bias, students of color are also more likely to be “pushed or pulled” into educating white community members and advocating for institutional change, all of which the report acknowledges consumes time and takes a “considerable emotional toll.”

The Counseling Center and resource centers hear many of these stories — “of being made to feel uncomfortable, sometimes unsafe, or that they are ‘other,’” the belonging report stated. “If belonging is characterized by feeling ‘at home’ (in a place, with other people and in one’s own skin), white students are more likely than students of color to experience this level of ease.”

To fully unpack the ways in which identity and experiences of identity shape the student experience, The Student turns to an archival analysis — in the hopes of shedding light on gaps that remain within the institution and current campus culture.

The Axis of Race When Amherst Uprising forced the campus to a standstill in November 2015, the sit-in in Frost Library centered marginalized students —

Continued on page 4

CompSci Professor Lyle McGeoch Remembered By College

Zach Jonas ’22 and Ryan Yu ’22 Managing News Editors

Lyle McGeoch, Brian E. Boyle ’69 professor of mathematics and computer science, passed away on Oct. 5 from a heart attack. He was 60 years old.

McGeoch was a professor at the college for over 30 years. During his time at Amherst, he chaired the computer science department and served as a class dean.

In an email to the college community, President Biddy Martin and Provost and Dean of Faculty Catherine Epstein praised McGeoch for his warmth and empathetic mind.

“Lyle was an extraordinary scholar, teacher and mentor; the most generous of college citizens; and a kind, modest and gentle

man,” Martin and Epstein wrote.

“As a class dean, he earned a reputation for the care and compassion that he brought to his work with students, including the lengths to which he went to help those who struggled the most.”

“He was also a cherished husband, father and grandfather, who treasured his immediate and extended family — including the Amherst community, of which he was such an integral and admired member for more than 30 years,” the email stated. “It is impossible to convey in words how dearly and deeply Lyle will be missed.”

An additional email sent by Chief of Student Affairs Karu Kozuma announced the resources available to students, including 24/7 on-call assistance, the Counseling Center, religious and spir-

itual life counseling, the Office of Student Affairs and the employee assistance program.

“It’s hard to find words to describe how keenly his loss will be and already is felt in our department, in the larger Amherst community and by me personally,” said Professor of Computer Science Kristen Gardner ’12, who was a student of McGeoch when she attended Amherst. “I’m grateful to have been his student, and I feel enormously privileged to have had the opportunity to work alongside him for the past few years.”

McGeoch was “genuinely interested in my success,” said Wayne Nyabuto ’21, who was McGeoch’s academic advisee for the entirety of Nyabuto’s time at Amherst.

“He was always willing to listen and help me figure things out

whenever I felt like I was struggling,” Nyabuto said. “The Amherst community has lost a great mentor and professor. Even worse, we’ve lost one of the purest souls we had on campus. His good work will remain in the hearts of all who interacted with him.”

When Sunghoon Kwak ’22 enrolled in McGeoch’s Introduction to Computer Science, he didn’t think he would enjoy it. “I left the class loving it, all because of how he taught the class … and how he connected with the students,” he said.

A remembrance gathering took place in the Friedmann Room on Oct. 7, which Kwak attended with a few of his classmates.

“We told stories about him …

[Director of Religious and Spiritual Life] Harrison Blum was there, and he was a great resource,” Kwak said.

“Just telling him about McGeoch, it was a way to cope and talk about his presence on campus.”

McGeoch’s obituary, which was published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette on Oct. 8, referred to him as “a good man who will be remembered above all for his indomitable kindness and generosity. He lived every day of his life the way he intended.”

In place of McGeoch, Professor of Computer Science John Rager will be teaching his Algorithms class, while Professor of Computer Science Scott Kaplan will teach Data Structures.

A funeral service will be held on Oct. 12 at 10 a.m. at the Wesley United Methodist Church in Hadley. The college will host a celebration of McGeoch’s life in Johnson Chapel on Dec. 14.

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

News 4

“I Would be a Great Diva,” RBG Says at College Event Continued from page 1 for people’s First Amendment and Fifth Amendment rights of freedom of self-expression and freedom from self-incrimination, respectively. “I wanted a well-paying job that would make the future better.”

When asked what she thought about the current state of freedom of speech in the United States, Ginsburg said that “we’ve done pretty well.”

“I am optimistic for the future, and I am especially optimistic about the people in this room and what you will do to repair tears in our society,” she said.

Martin, who hails from Virginia, proceeded to ask about the United States v. Virginia Supreme Court case in 1996, in which the federal government sued the state of Virginia over the men-only admissions policy at the Virginia Military Institute (VMI).

Ginsburg stressed the importance of the decision, which sided with the federal government and ordered VMI to admit women, adding that the vigor of the institution remained consistent and the decision “meant they could upgrade their applicant

pool.”

The sole dissenter in the case was the late Justice Antonin Scalia. Scalia, Ginsburg said, gave her his dissenting opinion early so she could consider its arguments while writing the majority opinion. “It absolutely ruined my weekend when I read [Scalia’s opinion],” Ginsburg said, laughing.

The pair infamously maintained a good friendship despite their conflicting judicial views. When they worked together on an appellate court prior to their Supreme Court appointments, Scalia would pass Ginsburg funny notes on the bench. Scalia also “cared about good writing,” like Ginsburg. The two were even featured in a comic opera portraying their friendship — “Scalia/Ginsburg” by composer Derrick Wang.

Moving toward other Supreme Court cases, Martin compared the unprecedented nature of both Brown v. Board of Education, which prohibited segregation in public schools, and Roe v. Wade, which ruled anti-abortion laws unconstitutional. Ginsburg countered the comparison, however, emphasizing that while Brown had prior court cases on which to build

Photo courtesy of Emma Swislow ‘20

In a Q&A session, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg spoke about forgivenes and joked that she would be a “diva” if not a lawyer. an argument, Roe did not have the same approach. “[Roe’s] decision was absolutely right,” Ginsburg said. “Texas had the most extreme abortion laws in the nation … The Court made every restrictive abortion law in the coun-

try, even in the most liberal states, unconstitutional. All the Court had to say was that extreme law is unconstitutional.”

“I think it might have been different if the Court took the approach that it took in Brown and take Texas’

most extreme law, then the next law and the next law,” she added.

Martin then asked Ginsburg about her relationship with her late husband Marty Ginsburg. “Marty

Continued on page 4

Racial Discrimination Debated in Harvard Lawsuit Continued from page 1 “Amherst welcomes and applauds the court’s decision, which affirms the importance and constitutionality of race-conscious admissions as part of a holistic review of applicants to our colleges and universities,” President Biddy Martin wrote in a statement on the college website. She emphasized that “our society depends for its well being on the identification and development of talent wherever it exists. It exists in every community and group.”

Martin is a member of the Harvard Corporation.

The judge was expected to follow existing precedent, said Professor of American Studies Franklin Odo, who has conducted extensive research on the case. “The fact that previous cases have time and time again approved the use of race as a minor factor in a holistic process — this probably led her to the conclu-

sion that she reached,” he said.

The decision is complicated by the conflation of the need for race-conscious admissions with discrimination against Asian-American applicants. Some of the news headlines that followed Burroughs’ decision automatically concluded that the judge’s ruling equaled a lack of discrimination against Asian Americans in admissions. These headlines tend to oversimplify the situation at hand, said Odo. “[The judge] did imply that there was implicit bias against Asian American applicants … regarding the personality [and] personal elements of the admissions process,” Odo said. “I think there was implicit, but not so much explicit discrimination happening. So there’s no smoking gun, but it’s hard to believe that there wasn’t some bias involved.”

While she allowed for the possibility of implicit biases, Burroughs ruled that Asian-American appli-

cants’ lower personal rating scores “are not the result of intentional discrimination.” She did, however, admit that Harvard’s admissions process was “not perfect,” suggesting the need for its admissions officers to undergo implicit bias training.

In an interview with WBURFM, Harvard professor and author of “The Diversity Bargain,” a book covering the issue of affirmative action, Natasha K. Warikoo discussed Blum’s “clever[ness]” in conflating the “two very different issues” of Asian American discrimination with affirmative action. “[Blum] has been trying to dismantle affirmative action for many years,” she said. “For this case, he decided to corral a group of Asian-Americans to try to attack affirmative action. And so this question of ‘is there discrimination against Asian Americans’ … we could imagine a scenario in which … there was found to be Asian

American discrimination and yet, we still think that affirmative action, race-based considerations for underrepresentation, makes a lot of sense.”

The decision, which was hailed as a win for race-conscious admissions, left the Asian-American community, both on campus and nationwide, feeling divided.

Sabrina Lin ’21 and Karina Thanawala ’21, who studied the case in Odo’s research colloquium last semester, said they felt both relieved and apprehensive about the decision.

“I think it’s definitely a victory for race-based affirmative action … but I also think it will be the first decision in a very long line of further court decisions and appeals,” Lin said.

Thanawala pointed to an important distinction in the case. “It’s not that I disagree with SFFA’s [claims of discrimination],” she said. “I just disagree with them jumping from

‘Harvard might be discriminating against Asian Americans’ to ‘This is why we should remove race-conscious admissions.’”

“I think that this case hides what actually needs to be shifted, which, in my opinion, are legacy and athlete admissions,” she added.

Eric Kim ’19, another member of the colloquium, researched the philosophical and moral implications of the Harvard lawsuit and found that SFFA supporters believe the admissions process should be as “fair or meritocratic as possible.”

“What [being meritocratic] means for them might be having the best academic performance, or the best resume,” he said. “But in reality, Harvard has no obligation to merely admit those with the best academic performances … the most amazing applicants doesn’t mean just academically amazing, but amazing in a

Continued on page 6

News 5

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

Archival Analysis Reveals Long-Standing Parallels Continued from page 4 people of color in particular — and their experiences of discrimination and racism at the college. The weekend-long Uprising, packed with hundreds of students, pushed this particular set of issues to the forefront of the community and demanded action and apology from the administration. In response, the administration created a presidential task force on diversity and inclusion and expanded resources in the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, which Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer Norm Jones joined shortly after.

Internal documents show, however, that continued “inequities in the distribution of, and access to, campus resources … [are] a core theme that undermines sense of belonging.”

While Amherst College is one of the most racially diverse elite institutions in the country, underrepresentation remains in athletics, academic departments and the faculty — not to mention the very fabric of the institutional culture itself.

Divisions are especially clear in athletics. In 2015, white students made up 47 percent of the student body overall, but they accounted for 74 percent of varsity athletes. Varsity athletes were also “far less likely” to be international (3 percent), low-income (4 percent) and first-generation (3 percent) than the overall student body, according to a 2017 diversity and inclusion report obtained by The Student.

“Recruiting is bi-directional: we must especially attend to how and why some historically underrepre-

sented groupings do or do not end up at Amherst, which might speak to potential students’ sense of our resources or commitment,” the report stated.

In the last decade, the college has taken steps to diversify the high schools from which it enrolls students. Though matriculation from school type has seen a general increase in public school attendance, steady decline in parochial schools and a plateauing in private schools, the percentage of black non-Hispanic students from public schools has “with significant variability, tended to decrease over time, from as high as 76 percent in 1989 to a low of 38 percent in 2016, when 48 percent of black non-Hispanic students matriculated from private high schools.” Asian and Pacific Islander students also tended to come from public high schools at a higher rate than other groups.

“It is not clear what the ideal ratio should be, butww … [t]here do appear to be by-products of admission recruitment practices that produce significant race and school type cohorts,” the 2017 report stated.

Interestingly, Asian students are grouped in with white students, rather than underrepresented minorities, in the “access and equity” portion of the diversity report. This is especially noteworthy in light of the recent ruling in the Harvard case, which upheld affirmative action and rejected discrimination against Asian-American applicants at the elite institution. The grouping raises concerns around the institution’s conception of the Asian student and the Asian identity, an apprehension shared by

numerous Asian and Asian-American students.

Though there is no racial achievement gap controlling for academic prediction in the first year, the report found a performance gap in final cumulative GPA that was attributable to being an underrepresented student of color, relative to white/Asian students.

“Black students gain in GPA from start to finish, but a significant portion do not gain as much as some other groups,” the 2017 report states.

“Something different is happening during their time at Amherst, which suggests that what we might have begun investigating as an academic ‘achievement’ gap is indeed an access, equity or support gap that is not merely attributable to ‘preparation.’”

Correspondingly, black students had the lowest four-year, five-year, six-year and never-graduated graduation rates. They were underrepresented among students who received department prizes and among students who graduated with a STEM major after stating STEM interest when admitted. The distribution of Latin honors in previous years was also disproportionately lower for black and Hispanic students.

These statistics raise a whole host of questions: how does the institution support or not support certain marginalized groups? What aspects of the college are black students encountering that result in an academic achievement gap? What aspects of the black student’s experience of the college — one that often navigates both blatant and covert racism — reflect inequities in resources and aca-

demic access? How does or doesn’t the college view Asian students as a minority group with its own issues around discrimination and inclusion? How is the college, an institution founded during the time of slavery and complicit in removing indigenous people from their land, attempting to redress the exclusion at the heart of its conception?

Multiple reports emphasized that marginalized students found solace and a sense of place among the resource centers in Keefe Campus Center. But high staff turnover in the resource center team — with the most recent departures of both the Multicultural Resource Center and Women’s and Gender Center directors in the last year — leaves students feeling disconnected and “contributes to campus narratives regarding the college’s inability to successfully recruit and retain talent from historically underrepresented and marginalized backgrounds and communities,” according to the 2017 diversity report.

A Look Back To examine these institutional records is all the more uncanny considering the similar language used in a 1980 internal report titled “Quality of Undergraduate Life.” The 126-page document covered all aspects of the student experience in breadth and depth, but its findings prove all the more the need to continue devoting time and attention to the issue of student engagement. Despite the nearly 40 years between the 1980 report and recent internal documents — and the drastically different demographics

of the student population — many of the issues discussed, and the ways they are discussed, draw parallels.

“Amherst College houses a diverse group of people,” the report states early on. “That does not make Amherst College diverse.”

For members of groups traditionally excluded from Amherst, this fact “has a wide-ranging effect upon their feelings of belonging in the institution, their comfort with the institution’s response to their presence here [and] their acceptance on their own terms by members of groups which traditionally have belonged to the institution.”

“It also may help to explain why it is sometimes so difficult for them to communicate the underlying unease many of them feel with the institution, for the roots of the problem are grounded in an ethos of the institution rather than in any one concrete practice or set of behaviors,” the report continued.

At the time, the college had opened applications to women just six years prior. Once on campus, however, both women and nonwhite students’ experienced “both attitudinal and institutional factors” that made them feel reduced to “second-class status at the college.”

The report emphasized the need for “substantial changes in [the college’s] entire cultural climate” and recognized that the “very articulation” of women’s and students of color’s needs was frequently perceived as a threat to other students’ opportunities “to get what they expected from

Continued on page 6

RBG Recounts Life Experiences at Widely-Attended Event Continued from page 5

cared that I had a brain,” Ginsburg said. Marty Ginsburg was also a good cook, so much so that their daughter eventually asked why her mother was the primary cook of the household.

Once Marty began cooking every day — in 1980 — Ginsburg never cooked again.

Following the conversation, the floor was open to pre-screened questions from the community. The Q&A covered Ginsbrug’s desired occupa-

tion if she had not gone into law (“I would be a great diva,” she said), her favorite cases she has decided on and practicing forgiveness.

One question asked about the role of the Court in addressing climate change. Stressing that the Court is not a legislative body, Ginsburg said it is instead “reactive” to the people and what they do about the climate.

Martin concluded by asking Ginsburg whether she anticipated future ratification of an equal rights amendment explicitly outlining

equal protection regardless of sex. “I hope so. When I pull out this pocket Constitution,” Ginsburg said, holding it up for the audience to see, “I would like to be able to say to my granddaughters the equal citizenship statute is as basic to our society as free speech.”

Kate Kopatic ’20, who attended the event, said that hearing Ginsburg talk was “surreal.”

“It is such an inspiration for us who may be striving for positions like hers, to see that happening,” Kopatic

said.

Witter Swanson ’21 echoed similar sentiments, adding that “it was incredible to see someone so influential and so sharp on a wide variety of topic ranges.”

For Maya Hossain ’21, while the event was “the coolest experience of my life,” some of Ginsburg’s viewpoints on political divisiveness caught Hossain by surprise.

“It was stunning to see someone so measured and calm, which surprised me more than I thought be-

cause I’m so entrenched in how divisive [politics] has gotten,” she said. “I found that some of her takes on anger were not what I expected … It’s the first time I’ve listened to an opinion like that and absorbed it and felt like I might incorporate it into my worldview of division.”

Nearly 130 students were also able to attend a seminar with Ginsburg and Austin Sarat, professor of law, jurisprudence and social thought.

The seminar discussed cases decided in the 2018-2019 term.

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

News 6

Decades Worth of Documents Show Room for Improvement Continued from page 5

their experience at the college.” White students, for example, reported the opinion that students of color associate more with each other than with whites, “thereby depriving white students of an important part of their education” — the chance to associate with people with different backgrounds. And these expectations remain without a second thought for white students who themselves associate exclusively among white students.

It is clear in comparing documents across time that much of the language used and needs articulated remain the same. Most students of color in the 1980 report described derogatory remarks, racial and ethnic slurs, “tactless and insensitive jokes” and social and residential patterns that excluded nonwhite students. They also pointed to student activities, dining arrangements, college-sponsored programs and campus media in which they saw “racist attitudes reflected.” When women and students of color raised these concerns, men and white students were often unsympathetic and considered their words “an assault upon the traditions of the institution.”

“Whereas most white students thought that the college’s courses, programs, activities, facilities and organizations were purposely established on their behalf, (as students, not as whites), Hispanic and black students said that there are few places in the college where

they can feel at home,” the report stated.

Similar to students of color’s current relationship with the resource centers, black and Hispanic students highlighted the Gerald Penny Cultural Center, Charles Drew House and Jose Martí Center as the only places that provided a comfortable setting, individual rooms aside. One student of color quoted in the report said it is “important not to forget where I am. Amherst makes it hard to remember, to retain a sense of home, to feel a sense of pride, to be able to go back and feel that we have learned something about ourselves.”

Here and Now The 1980 report proves that issues around race and identity are ongoing.

The college has without a doubt made improvements over the years, including recently opened spaces for Asian and native affinity groups and the removal of the Lord Jeff as its unofficial mascot.

It is, however, equally necessary to point out the invisibility of specific voices and experiences in a large number of college documents. All of the recent documents reviewed by The Student, in fact, identify key areas in which the college is currently lacking.

While the diversity report collected data on Asian-American, black, Hispanic and white students, there was a dearth of information about the experiences of Pacific Islander and native students. Meanwhile, decades-long struggles have established black studies, Latinx and Latin American studies

(LLAS) and sexuality, women and gender studies, but the college continues to lag in creating an Asian American studies major despite high enrollment numbers in Asian American studies classes.

Areas of curriculum that require more resources, the diversity report stated, include educational studies, LLAS, African studies, Southeast Asia/Pacific Islander studies and Asian American studies. Students with disabilities continue to voice complaints about the largely inaccessible campus — as well as the two-person staff serving students in the accessibility services office.

In the last few years, the campus has been embroiled in various controversies related to discrimination and racism. Students rallied against anti-black violence and sentiment when a noose was found on Pratt Field in 2017. Homophobic and transphobic language was found written on chalkboards in Greenway and in the Amherst College Republicans’ GroupMe. In 2016, a female Asian-American student posted on Facebook about a white male student who approached her friends outside of a dormitory, threw a can of beer at them and questioned their presence in his “living space.” After the encounter escalated, he said he wasn’t a racist, that he was paying “full tuition” and that the Asian-American student should be thankful she was at Amherst.

Her post received over 800 reacts and 149 shares.

Just last semester, The Student reported on an incident at a men’s lacrosse

party in which a swastika was drawn on an unconscious student’s forehead and then circulated on Snapchat. The Common Language Document and its subsequent fallout received national attention. An investigation by The Student revealed that faculty of color are denied tenure at higher rates then white faculty, an inequity that directly impacts students, not to mention the professors themselves.

Though the college addresses issues of potential bias on a case-by-case basis, it does not follow a standardized bias response protocol, a fact noted in last year’s belonging report. “Whether it is transphobic language written on a college property, comments made in residence halls or outside of buildings, or problematic comments made by faculty, the absence of filed complaints typically means that such issues go largely unresolved,” the diversity report stated.

“Coming forward with a complaint almost entirely relies upon a person’s trust in a system that can investigate and adjudicate. Many of the students who are aggrieved report not having such trust in our current processes.”

This lack of trust is heightened by a “decentralization and apparent lack of consistency in the practices and procedures on campus,” the diversity report noted. In many of the documents examined by The Student, including the 2018 evaluation by a NECHE reaccreditation team, authors highlight the college’s culture of individualism as both good and bad. The open curricu-

lum, for example, was shown to induce higher levels of motivation and engagement among students and faculty, but the assumption that each student has the knowledge and capital to navigate the decentralized structures of the institution increases “the risk that it leads to an environment of isolation and discouragement, especially for those who come to Amherst without prior connections and/or understanding of the nuances of this culture,” according to the diversity report.

It’s eerily evocative of the 40-yearold document: “First, and more obvious, since the college considers the recruitment of significant numbers of minority students an institutional priority, the college has the obligation to ensure that the students so recruited are not merely set adrift to fend for themselves once they arrive on campus, but are provided with the environment and institutional support which will enable them to make the most of their college experience. Second, improvement in the racial climate at the college is essential to help all students learn how to recognize and cope with problems which they will find upon leaving the college and entering the adult world.”

These two goals — as evidenced in the various archival records analyzed

by The Student — are not yet realized.

But that doesn’t mean the college and the larger community aren’t working on them. There is still a long way to go, much of it behind the scenes and invisible labor, but it is a constant process.

Court Sides With Harvard in Affirmative Action Case Continued from page 4

holistic sense. Not just what they’ve done, but also who they are.”

That doesn’t mean, however, that bias doesn’t exist in the admissions process, said Warikoo.

“Another way in which all students of color are being excluded and being dinged,” she said, “is these legacies, a boost for children of alumni, a boost for people whose parents are donating to the university, a boost for athletic recruits who are majority white, a boost for faculty children — all of these categories are categories in which white students are gaining a leg up over all students of color … These are already privileged students who are getting

even more advantages.”

Last month, the National Bureau of Economic Research published a study which found that 43 percent of white students admitted to Harvard were recruited athletes, legacy students, children of faculty and staff or on the dean’s list — applicants whose parents or relatives have donated to Harvard (ALDCs). For black, Latinx and Asian American students, this number drops to less than 16 percent. The study also found that roughly 75 percent of the white students admitted from those four categories “would have been rejected if they had been treated as white non-ALDCs.” According to journalist Dan Brown, over the 15 years prior to

2004, Amherst had admitted 50 percent of alumni children as opposed to 20 percent of all applications. Legacy students are further granted the opportunity to meet and interact with the dean of admissions during Dean’s Day. Based on previous admissions reports, about seven to 13 percent of admitted students every year are expected to be legacies. The disparities carry over to athletics, too: athletes at the college are disproportionately more white and less low-income compared to the larger student body.

Odo noted that one probable effect of this trial is increased attention to how the current college admissions process perpetuates existing power hierarchies. He is hopeful that the

lawsuit will raise more awareness to systems which favor the already privileged. “I think the elite institutions are going to do some reflecting on this, but the administrators want to be able to do this on their own terms; they don’t want the courts to be telling them what to do,” Odo said. “My guess is that the [processes laid bare in this lawsuit] are enough of a warning so that at least some elite institutions will be trimming the number of white ALDC acceptances.”

According to Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid Matt McGann, admissions officers at Amherst undergo implicit bias training; he did not specify how often these trainings occur. “I don’t know that you can ever elimi-

nate every person’s unconscious bias,” McGann said. “We don’t just dive headlong into the review of the applications, but instead we take significant time leading up to the review to talk about things like unconscious and implicit bias.”

SFFA announced last Friday that they are appealing Burroughs’ decision. Blum stated in the court filing that “Students for Fair Admissions looks forward to making our appeal to the U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals and, if necessary, to the U.S. Supreme Court.” According to McGann, the college will likely file an amicus brief in support of Harvard as it did in Fisher v. University of Texas, an earlier challenge to race-conscious admissions.

Opinion

w

The Fight Does Not End Here One of the most closely-watched cases in higher education received judgment last week when District Judge Allison D. Burroughs ruled in favor of Harvard in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. The decision marks a great victory for advocates of affirmative action, but it is also important to recognize the complexity behind the decision and its implications for Asian Americans in the college admissions process. And so, while we applaud Judge Burrough’s decision to uphold the basic tenets of affirmative action, her nearly unequivocal ruling in support of Harvard’s admissions process must be carefully analyzed for its tacit support of Harvard’s biased practices against Asian Americans.

The legal fight against affirmative action in college admissions did not and will not end with this case.

Ever since the 1978 Supreme Court case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, in which the Court declared explicit racial quotas to be unconstitutional, activists against affirmative action have attempted to make the practice wholly illegal in America. Most significant of these activists is Edward Blum, the mastermind behind the Harvard case and countless other cases targeting affirmative action. Blum has not received favorable judgments in his previous cases, many of which put forth white students as plaintiffs. It can be argued that he chose to appropriate the Asian-American community to be poster children of his anti-affirmative action mission in the hope that it would result in a more successful ruling.

Let us be clear: affirmative action is a system that continues to benefit college and university campuses throughout our nation. Affirmative action is critical for those in underrepresented racial groups because it grants them important seats at the table of higher education and beyond. Furthermore, affirmative action serves as a corrective to decades of injustice and exclusion against black Americans. Therefore, admission into colleges and universities, regardless of their prestige, is an important tool for social mobility and the combating of many of the racial inequalities in our society. It goes without saying that affirmative action and its effects on campus diversity improves the academic experience for everyone involved, including Asian Americans.

It is disappointing that Students for Fair Admissions, led by Blum, chose to target the system of affirmative action without taking a second look at the highly unmeritocratic system of preferential admissions, which admits many students that are not people of color. A 2019 study revealed that between 2009 and 2014, 43 percent of white students at Harvard were either legacy students, recruited athletes, children of faculty/staff or the children of donors. Less than 16 percent of African American, Asian American and Hispanic admits were a part of any of these groups.

There is no doubt that the system of college admissions, especially at elite institutions like Harvard, is inherently unequal. So to go after affirmative action, not preferential

admissions, as the source of the inequality is misguided.

Even so, the problem with Judge Burroughs’ decision is the implication that the Harvard’s admissions process is not at all biased toward Asian Americans. No one can discredit the fact that, as shown in documents filed in the case, AsianAmerican applicants are disproportionately assigned low “personal ratings” and systematically described as “bland,” “quiet” and “not exciting” by Harvard’s admissions officers — playing into long-held racist stereotypes making Asian Americans out to be robots and submissive nerds. The perpetuation of the stereotype that Asian Americans are quiet and timid is inherently unjust. For decades, Asian Americans have fought against the oppressive “model minority” myth, which is used as a racial wedge between Asian Americans and other minority groups to the benefit of white Americans. The fact that an institution like Harvard is taking this trope and using it against their Asian-American applicants raises cause for concern, separate from the question of affirmative action.

While Judge Burroughs acknowledged these lower ratings and comments in her decision, she cited the testimony of Harvard admissions officers as evidence of a lack of discrimination in Harvard’s admissions process. No reasonable person is going to willfully admit to explicit discrimination and implicit bias in a court of law, even under oath — the officers themselves may not even be aware of their unconscious prejudices. But even if admissions officers were not explicitly discriminatory towards Asian-American applicants, the implicit bias that led to these lower personal ratings and comments remains.

Of course, it would be difficult, perhaps impossible, to find a causal relationship between lower personal comments and an applicant’s identity as an Asian American, but the correlation continues to exist in the system. Judge Burroughs’ decision, which provided no legal solution for this implicit bias and negative correlation, ultimately does nothing to repair Harvard’s broken system.

So where does the fight go from here? It’s clear that this case is not over, with SFFA’s intention to take the fight all the way to the Supreme Court. Yet, regardless of the outcome, the systemic inequality of Harvard’s admissions process will not be solved. A reasonable solution to this issue may indeed involve the preservation of affirmative action with the dissolution of preferential treatment toward white legacy students and athletes. If Harvard is truly an institution that values and celebrates its commitment to diversity, it should do so with full force. And if Amherst College hopes to do the same to uphold its reputation as a diverse and just-minded institution, it must recognize the nuances of the case and consider its own treatment of Asian-American students and applicants. As of now, that “commitment” remains shaky at best.

Unsigned editorials represent the Editorial Board (assenting: 13; dissenting: 1; abstaining: 0)

THE AMHERST

STUDENT E X E C U T I V E B OA R D Editors-in-Chief Shawna Chen Emma Swislow Managing News Zach Jonas Natalie De Rosa Ryan Yu Managing Opinion Jae Yun Ham Rebecca Picciotto Managing Arts and Living Olivia Gieger Seoyeon Kim Managing Sports Connor Haugh Henry Newton Managing Design Zehra Madhavan Julia Shea S TA F F Publishers Emmy Sohn Mark Nathin Digital Director Dylan Momplaisir

Letters Policy The opinion pages of The Amherst Student are intended as an open forum for the Amherst community.

The Student will print letters under 450 words in length if they are submitted to The Student offices in the Campus Center or to the paper’s email account (astudent@amherst.edu) by noon on Sunday, after which they will not be accepted.

The editors reserve the right to edit any letters exceeding the 450-word limit or to withhold any letter because of considerations of space or content.

Letters must bear the names of all contributors and a phone number or email address where the author or authors may be reached. Letters and columns may be edited for clarity and Student style.

Publication Standards The Amherst Student is published weekly except during college vacations. The subscription rate is $75 per year or $40 per semester.

The offices of The Amherst Student are located in the basement of Morrow Dormitory, Amherst College. All contents copyright © 2019 by The Amherst Student, Inc. All rights reserved. The Amherst Student logo is a trademark of The Amherst Student, Inc. Additionally, The Amherst Student does not discriminate on the basis of gender, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation or age. The views expressed in this publication do not reflect the views of The Amherst Student.

Connect With Us Email: astudent@amherst.edu Twitter: @amherststudent Instagram: @amherststudent Like The Amherst Student on Facebook amherststudent.com.

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

Opinion 8

Seeing Double: An Empire of Sand Thomas Brodey ’22 Columnist Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has reigned as the world’s foremost superpower.

Americans hoped that we would use our supremacy to spread democracy and security to the rest of the world. Yet in the nearly 30 years since the end of the Cold War, it has become obvious that these goals are beyond the capabilities of the United States and often incompatible with the ideals of human rights and self-determination. If the United States wants a moral and effective foreign policy, it needs to rein in its ambitions and admit that total American supremacy is a fantasy.

Though the United States should play a major role in world affairs, the past 30 years have seen American policy take an unnecessarily blunt and unilateral approach. It’s time to look past rhetoric and examine the benefits that our primacy offers both the world as a whole and ourselves.

Although the Soviet Union collapsed decades ago, American international policy has not fundamentally changed since the Cold War. The United States continues to attempt to expand its sphere of influence in any way possible. We maintain military forces across the world, with troops in over 150 countries. While these troops were once deployed to safeguard against the threat of communism, they now remain to supposedly prevent terrorism. To project power around the world, the United States maintains a huge and cumbersome network of allies, ranging from the democratic United Kingdom to more repressive states like Iraq and Pakistan.

The problem is that these allies have little interest in helping the United States. The old adage that “he who has everyone as a friend has no friends” proves true. Instead, the United States finds itself shackled to allies of convenience.

States like Saudi Arabia take advantage of American backing by using our money and implicit support to commit human rights violations and start illegal wars — such as the

brutal Saudi intervention in Yemen.

These states harm America’s image and its ability to take a stand on human rights because the United States fears that taking too hard a stance will end these alliances.

Instead of courting the approval of petty dictators, the United States should bolster its relationship with nations that have similar ideals, such as the United Kingdom. Shrinking the American alliance system may slightly deflate America’s sphere of influence, but it would strengthen our ability to remain morally consistent. A smaller, more unified coalition would also allow the U.S. to focus its resources in a more targeted way, responding effectively to the most pressing threats, rather than trying to somehow prevent against every conceivable threat.

The foundation of American power lies in its military might.

Accordingly, the United States has poured over $20 trillion into the military since the end of the Cold War. But as the misadventures in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya show, no amount of money deems our armed forces a worldwide police force, nor does military presence guarantee democracy or stability in occupied countries. In fact, America’s foreign intervention often leads to violent reprisals like the 9/11 ter-

“ The fundamental

problem with the idea of American democratic expansion is that in the long term, democracy cannot be imposed on a country by another.

”

ror attacks. Yet despite the military’s limitations, the American government insists on launching global missions with open-ended goals — such as the “war on terror.” Unsurprisingly, the military has not been able to achieve its goals because the lofty ambitions placed upon it are too great for any one country, even a superpower, to fulfill. Spread-

Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

The United States must reconsider its goal of imposing democracies on other nations and instead develop relationships with key allies, says Brodey ‘22. ing out our resources around the world actually harms our ability to counter threats posed by Russia and China and saddles our country with enormous debt, selling out the future of the American economy simply to project a facade of power.

But even if the United States had the resources to be the world’s policeman, that would not mean that our intervention would be a net good for the world. Despite hopes that American dominance would reduce the need for force, the Congressional Research Service has determined that America has used major military force in foreign countries over 200 times in the 28 years since the end of the Cold War, compared to 46 times during the entire 50-year Cold War. At times, these interventions have been beneficial and relatively successful, such as the intervention to stop ethnic cleansing in Albania. But far too often, intervention only creates more instability and suffering. A 2018 study by Brown University estimated that the United States and its allies have directly killed over 200,000 civilians in Iraq since 9/11 and tens of thousands more in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The fundamental problem with the idea of American democratic expansion is that in the long term, democracy cannot be imposed

on one country by another. A stable democratic system must be homegrown. If the United States restrained its global involvement, countries could have more control of their own destinies. A country’s path to democracy might not be an easy one, but imposing a democratic regime by force, as the United States has done in Iraq and Afghanistan, or worse, helping dictators overthrow democracies, as the United States has done in Nicaragua and Iran, do far more harm than good.

One might argue that instead of reducing direct global involvement, the United States should simply stop killing large numbers of civilians and overthrowing democratic regimes. But these misdeeds are an integral part of our international policy. Overwhelming military force, with all its negative side effects, is the cornerstone of America’s global supremacy, so to say that America could continue its supremacy without frequent use of military force is naive. The U.S. never sets out to kill huge numbers of civilians; it comes as a consequence of fighting a war.

Whether or not the American people approve of the government’s methods, presidents have proven themselves willing to commit atrocities, so long as these atrocities

serve the maintenance of American primacy, a goal which the government hasn’t seriously questioned in over 50 years. Instead of focusing solely on the symptoms, Americans should grapple with the underlying cause of the violence: overambitious and morally dubious strategic goals.

It’s time for the United States to reevaluate its foreign policy goals.

As China’s economy grows and the gap between American goals and American capabilities widens, our status as a superpower is already coming into question. The United States has two choices. It can either accept the limitations of its power and embark on a morally consistent and focused policy with a core group of like-minded allies, or continue to stand by its policy of dominance at any cost, until the gap between rhetoric and reality grows so great that the whole house of cards comes crashing down.

America should not withdraw from world politics. I only suggest giving up the egotistical and dangerous dream of a world dominated by the U.S. Just as Americans have an instinctive suspicion of any one man who thinks himself wise enough to control an entire state, Americans should be wary of any world where one nation possesses undisputed control.

Arts&Living

Thirii Myo Kyaw Myint Explores Self in Upcoming “Zat Lun”

Photo courtesy of Amherst College

Last Thursday, visiting writer Thirii Myo Kyaw Myint delivered an evocative and moving reading of her still-in-progress family history project titled “Zat Lun,” which will be released in early 2021.

Paige Reddington ’21 Staff Writer Amherst College’s Creative Writing Fall Reading Series continued its momentum when visiting writer Thirii Myo Kyaw Myint spoke on Oct. 2 in Frost Library’s Center for Humanistic Inquiry.

Myint arrived at Amherst this fall after completing her doctorate in creative writing at the University of Denver.

She published her book “The End of Peril, the End of Enmity, the End of Strife, A Haven” in 2018. “The End of Peril” was critically acclaimed — a finalist for the 2016 Noemi Press Book Award for Fiction.

Her latest work is a family history project called “Zat Lun,” which won the 2018 Graywolf Press Nonfiction Prize and will be released in early 2021.

In their introduction of Myint, Professor of English Judith Frank noted that Myint describes her work as “genre queer” and “pushing the boundaries between genre, identity, longing, reality and myth.”

Myint then read an excerpt from her forthcoming book “Zat Lun.” She started writing the project three years ago as a family history project, interviewing her parents as a part of it.

The project initially came from a fear of her parents’ deaths, and slowly developed into a book that grapples with the question “What constitutes the self?”

“Zat Lun” explores how and if our ancestors and our environment are a part of ourselves. Each chapter is based on a certain place from Myint’s life. However, the book is still a work in progress.

“I like to read works in prog-

ress on purpose,” Myint said at the reading, “because I like to sort of share the subliminal moment with you all.”

We would have never known it was a work in process.

The excerpt that Myint read was taken from the beginning of the book. It starts with a beautiful, idyllic description of her great-grandmother’s village, the village which Myint herself was born in and depicts the refuge it provided for her before violence struck.

The work is told in a mythical way, recounting the beautiful and bountiful history behind her family.

I instantly felt connected and intimate with Myint — it was as if she was letting us in on the legend of her family, entrusting the audience with this information.

The way Myint told the story

had a musical quality which allowed us to visualize her family as if we could go back in time and be there with her ancestors.

I was able to see the enormous role family history has played in Myint’s life, and I was instantly drawn in and honored to be let in on this history.

Myint spoke about how her experiences as an Asian-American writer don’t necessarily fit in with the typical identity of an Asian-American writer.

As a Burmese writer who moved to Bangkok at a young age, she described feeling like a foreigner.

She touched on how it is important to own her identity as an Asian-American writer in order to expand the term — and how some people are not even aware that Burma is located in Asia.

“It’s really important to posi-

tion myself as an Asian-American writer because it’s such a huge umbrella term,” she elaborated.

“But I’ve realized that the only way that term is going to sort of expand its definition is if people who might be at the margins really come to own the term also.”

“So I think it’s important for me to own that term and be like, ‘Hey, we [Burmese-American writers] are part of this conversation, too,’ because I do think there’s a lot of similarities but also important differences across our experiences.”

Myint’s words of wisdom to aspiring writers is to be persistent.

She discussed the arbitrariness of “talent” in producing powerful narratives.

“Something that I learned is that it’s not necessarily the most talented person that becomes a writer, it’s the person that keeps writing;” she noted. She emphasized that how writing is about self-discovery — we must craft and own our narratives.

When asked how her experiences have defined her writing, she explained: “If you don’t create your own language, you won’t be able to have that language serve you — so you have to start from the beginning and start your own language.”

Myint emphasized the power of language in self-empowerment. “You can’t have someone else’s language, someone else’s form, and have it work for you,” she stressed.

Myint’s writing is a reminder of all the various ways that our ancestors and our environment have inevitably continued to shape who we are and how our narratives have unraveled.

Each of our narratives are profoundly different — Myint reminds us of the power of expressing our own stories and making them heard, rather than attempting to fit the mold of a previous narrative that is not uniquely yours.

Arts & Living 10

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

How My Taylor Swift Love Affair Continues On “Lover”

Photo courtesy of South China Morning Post

With her recent album and appearance on “Saturday Night Live,” Taylor Swift continually forces us to question our understanding of her as an artist.

Olivia Gieger ’21 Managing Arts & Living Editor Watching Taylor Swift on “Saturday Night Live” this past weekend felt off in a way that’s difficult to put into words. What is Taylor Swift doing singing onstage with a saxophone? Why does she perform with such uncomfortably imposed swagger? It all seemed out of place and out of character, as Swift stood with hazy smoke around her ankles and sat in kelly-green at the piano.

But it’s not the setting that seemed strange — there is no question of the abundance of flashy performance today. I could easily imagine nearly any other artist standing on stage like that, awkwardly dancing or trendily dressed; it was simply seeing Swift in that setting that seemed wrong and a far cry from her first appearance on the show, in 2009, when she stood and performed with her guitar. Over those 10 years, it’s natural to expect change, but somehow our perception of Swift as an artist struggles to evolve with her. How do we come to terms with a musician’s drastic evolution over time before our eyes?

For me, Taylor Swift — at her

best — is the deep, thoughtful music of fall. Her songs are the anthems I would listen to on my way home from summer camp, going back to school bopping my head to the pop-y beats of “Our Song” and “Teardrops on My Guitar” through the headphones attached to my tiny MP3-player in third grade. When I moved to a new school and a new house, I listened to “Fearless” that November on repeat off the giant stereo I now kept in my new room.

“Blank Space” was the soundtrack of Thanksgiving 2014, as my sister and I played the song on constant loop, learning every word. The lyrics of “Reputation” are what I latched onto as a new first-year at Amherst, trying to figure out what it meant to break up with your high school boyfriend and be cast into this lonely new environment.

With each chapter of my life, there has been a Taylor Swift album to accompany it (all of her albums, excluding the most recent, were released in October or November).

And so, despite its late August release, I’ve found these past few days of early October to be the ones during which I’ve allowed myself to dive deeper into Swift’s latest album, “Lover.”

At this point, the album is far from new; it has been over a month since its release, and it has already been whisked out of the top charts.

But it’s not the catered, ready-made hits off the album that keep me listening to it. What I love, and have always loved, about Taylor Swift is the keen, poetic detail and observation she brings to her music.

It’s the picture she paints in her songs, with the words “our song is a slamming screen door / Sneaking out late tapping on your window / When we’re on the phone and you talk real slow / ‘Cause it’s late and your mama don’t know,” that filled 7-year-old me with imagination and a vivid picture of what life might be like in high school. It’s the same eye that builds the image in “New Year’s Day” of “glitter on the floor after the party / Girls carrying their shoes down in the lobby / Candle wax and Polaroids on the hardwood floor.” When she does it well, Swift can craft poetic lyrics that show a deep appreciation for the beauty of the small things that build up the world around us.

It’s not to say that Swift is alone in doing this. It’s the same reason I love the music of Lizzo and Hozier, Maggie Rogers and Anderson.

Paak, Børns and Kanye (though, yes I know as a political figure he is polarizing). But Swift is one of the rare artists who is able to combine these artful, vivid lines into a pop package. Her pop peers are nowhere in her league when it comes to taking this artistic appreciation for words into the fluffy pop-sphere.

Notably, it’s where she tries to really keep up with the tone and style of other current pop artists — on her album singles — that she falls apart. “You Need to Calm Down” and “ME!” truly suck and are obvious grabs for attention and radio air time (the cheeky “Hey kids! spelling is fun!” will forever haunt listeners).

It’s the underexplored songs on the album that are not over-produced and over-written in which we see Swift do what she does, and has always done, best: writing tight lines of sharp, observant wordplay.

“Lover” offers a glimpse into how Swift is learning to balance the identity she’s come into as a popstar with the one she’s always had as a songwriter. There are still sure misses, like “Archer” and “Daylight” (as so much of “Reputation” was) where she leans in too far to embody the pop star, but we see her

adjusting to what it means for her to live in that role (while being genuine to herself and her style) more and more.

“Cruel Summer” is an emotional sucker punch to the stomach because it strikes this balance between pop star and songwriter so well. Swift is still Swift in it, even with the heavy bass and electronic echoing voices in the back.

She sings “I’m drunk in the back of the car / And I cried like a baby coming home from the bar / Said ‘I’m fine’ but it wasn’t true,” painting the same scenes that she did so well on her 2006 debut album “Taylor Swift.” Yet she simultaneously sings “I don’t wanna keep secrets just to keep you” and raspily shouts “I love you, ain’t that the worst thing you ever heard?”, pulling the song into line with the sound expected from an artist in 2019.

The combination creates a song and a sentiment so raw and emotional, in a way that Swift has not achieved in years. “Soon You’ll Get Better,” a Dixie Chicks collab which could easily be on “Fearless” or “Taylor Swift,” is the most flagrant return to old Taylor.

Continued on page 11

Arts & Living 11

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

Why “Mindhunter” Should Be Next on Your Netflix Queue Isabella Weiner ’20 Staff Writer Looking for a new show on Netflix this fall break? Try “Mindhunter,” but skip the first episode. The drama, which debuted on the platform in 2017, follows Holden Ford (Jonathan Groff), a young, brilliant FBI agent who comes up with the idea to interview America’s most notorious serial killers.

It’s a tale inspired by the true story of the Special Agent John Douglas, who detailed his experiences in his memoir “Mindhunter: Inside the FBI’s Elite Serial Crime Unit.” Douglas, and in the dramatized rendering Ford, is the first to interview the country’s most dangerous killers.

His reasoning: knowing these killers’ motivations, patterns and tics would help the FBI agents create profiles and ultimately apprehend other serial killers.

His logic is that returning to the scene of the crime to re-experience the feelings of pleasure and unbridled power — getting inside the killer’s mind — is the only way to truly understand, and stop, killings. This makes sense — how can you catch a criminal you don’t understand — but in the show’s setting of 1970s America, where the term “serial killer” did not yet exist, it was a truly radical idea. In fact, it was Robert Ressler, the real-life agent inspiring Holden’s fictional partner Bill Tench (Holt McCallany), who coined the very term “serial

killer,” an event which the show reimagines as a rapid-fire conversation.

Teaming up with academic Dr. Wendy Carr (a fictionalized Ann Burgess), Ford and Tench zig-zag across the country conducting their interviews. The serial killers across the two seasons — including loquacious Ed Kemper, teenage dirtbag Monte Rissell, “Son of Sam” David Berkowitz, “tiny” Charles Manson and downright terrifying Richard Speck — are all uncannily portrayed by no-name actors who bear a striking resemblance to the real killers. (In a twist of coincidental casting, Damon Herriman steps into the role of Manson and fills the same role in Quentin Tarantino’s “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.”)

What’s more frightening is that the show stages most of these interviews almost word for word as they occurred in real life.

Another distinctive aspect of the show, given its genre and the current explosion in popularity of true crime series, is that it is almost entirely bloodless. Instead, each episode opens with a minute-long scene from the mundane aspects in the life of the killer BTK, the name Dennis Rader gave himself for his sadistic method of killing: bind, torture, kill.

We see him at the library doodling sketches of victims, driving by potential homes or sending letters — presumably to the press boasting about his kills. There

Photo courtesy of Cuaderno de Cultura Cientifica

“Mindhunter” takes its audience on a suspenseful, adrenaline-filled ride, showing tense scenes of interviews with the country’s most dangerous killers. are occasionally glimpses of brutalized bodies, usually in photos fom the crime scenes, but the genre’s usual unsettling convention of potraying violence against women is absent. Of course, the killers at the show’s center are espousing disgusting acts and ideas of violence about women, but this immense physical violence takes place off screen.

While largely comprised of scenes of sitting and talking, “Mindhunter” remains terrifying. One sequence in season two, when Tench interviews BTK survivor Kevin Bright — who insists Tench not look back at his face, severely damaged after surviving

several gunshots from the killer — is truly bone-chilling.

Often after watching the show, I both lock my door and fall into a Wikipedia binge, reading about the gruesome realities fictionalized in the show. (There’s also apparently a “Murderpedia,” an encyclopedia of murderers, if you’re into that sort of thing).

The second season is even better than the first. It deviates from the first season’s “crime of the week” structure to instead zero in on one crime for the whole season. It follows the 1979-1981 Atlanta child murders that claimed the lives of 28 children. There, Ford finds him-

self completely out of his depth when dealing with race and local politics as well as the fact that his psychology of killer interviews is not particularly well-received in the community.

Excelling in its realistic portrayal, the show illustrates how these cases are steeped in frustration and ambiguity, not tied up neatly with a bow. David Fincher, who has also directed “The Social Network,” “Se7en” and “Fight Club,” is on hand as a producer and director for a handful of the episodes; he has also planned on releasing five seasons of the show. Bring them on.

Swift Continues to Evolve as an Artist in Newest Album Continued from page 10 On the track about her mother’s fight with cancer, Swift sings “The buttons of my coat were tangled in my hair / In doctor’s office lighting, I didn’t tell you I was scared” and illustrates the heart wrenching scene of fumbling with shaking hands upon hearing the worst.

The song peaks with the line “And I hate to make this all about me / But who am I supposed to

talk to? / What am I supposed to do / If there’s no you?” It’s impossible to hear her words and not feel some deep pang of sympathy, not just for Swift, but also for ourselves, as she pinpoints exactly what is so scary about losing someone. It’s so real, honest and raw.

She continues her emotional openness in her eponymous track “Lover,” which seems like the narrative sequel to “Reputation’s” “New Year’s Day,” as she

sings “We can keep the Christmas lights up ‘til January / It’s our house, we make the rules.” In the same attentive way, she crafts an image of the tiny and subtle ins and outs of a relationship, which she matches with grand sweeping proclamations of love.

She sings a mock wedding vow: “Ladies and gentlemen, will you please stand? ... / I take this magnetic force of a man to be my lover / My heart’s been borrowed and yours has been blue” — with

the intimate sweetest details of a relationship — “and you’ll save all your dirtiest jokes for me / And at every table, I’ll save you a seat.”

Behind the atrocities of “ME!” and “You Need to Calm Down,” Swift is returning to honesty on her most recent album. Looking at the album as a whole, she returns not only thematically to songs and stories of her past, but also stylistically, as she re-embraces what makes her shine as an artist: astute observations

wrapped cleverly into lyrics.

She’s not fully there yet, but perhaps this is what makes the album so worthwhile to listen to. We get to chart her growth ebbing and flowing over seven albums.

I’ve grown up alongside Taylor Swift, watching her struggle to define herself and her image as I have grown and grappled to do the same; Taylor Swift is constantly reinventing herself, and so am I.

Arts & Living 12

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

“Joker” Showcases Powerful Acting, But Fails On Plot

Photo courtesy of Revelist

Todd Phillips’ “Joker” attempts to tell an origin story that has never been told before — but fails to establish a clear message with its chaotic storyline.

Seoyeon Kim ’21 and Gaby Bucio ’21 Managing Arts & Living Editor and Staff Writer Despite the controversy surrounding its depiction of violence and loneliness, “Joker” broke box office records this weekend, bringing in $96 million in North America and making the film the highest-grossing October opening of all time.

Prior to its official release, the movie was both lauded and criticized, winning the top prize at the Venice Film Festival while its most vocal critics pointed out the film’s potential to incite violence.

“Joker,” directed by the “Hangover” trilogy’s Todd Phillips (an unexpected pairing given the movie’s dark and gritty plot) is an origin story which follows Arthur Fleck (the incredible Joaquin Phoenix) in his transformation from an aspiring stand-up comedian, who is neglected and mentally ill, into a murderous clown.

The film’s storyline has been compared to an incel (involuntary celebate) manual; incels, a group which has been on the rise through websites like 4chan, are men who

believe they are denied sex and attention (from women in particular) because of social sentiments and political movements, like #MeToo. There were also concerns over how Arthur, who is arguably portrayed in a sympathetic light at times, fits the profile of many mass shooters.

Family members and friends of those killed in the 2012 mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado, at a screening of “The Dark Knight” wrote to Warner Bros. on Sept. 24 to express their concerns over the movie’s release.

The studio replied in a statement claiming that “neither the fictional character Joker, nor the film, is an endorsement of real-world violence of any kind … It is not the intention of the film, the filmmakers or the studio to hold this character up as a hero.”

Aside from the controversy regarding the movie’s potential to negatively influence susceptible audiences, “Joker” sparks debate about the quality of its plot and its portrayal of the iconic character.

But above all else, it is important to note Phoenix’s brilliance as an actor.

Phoenix, much like in all of his previous films, delivers a phenome-

nal performance, powerfully evoking and transmitting every emotion possible in the human spectrum. A true chameleon, Phoenix morphs into a haunting figure that inspires both pity and fear.

He had big shoes to fill following fan favorite Heath Ledger’s exceptional interpretation of the Joker in Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Night” (let’s not talk about Jared Leto’s atrocious rendition in “Suicide Squad”). Fortunately, Phoenix does not disappoint.

“Joker” as a whole, however, flounders terribly. Until this film, perhaps the most alluring thing about the Joker’s character was his mysteriousness. Nobody knew where he came from, and nobody knew what to expect from him; he was an enigma. Phillips attempts to maintain this ambiguity and opacity while telling his origin story — but ultimately fails.

There are glimpses of ambitious storytelling throughout the film; however, these brief moments are regrettably overshadowed by the persistently confusing plot. As the story develops, we are left with more questions than answers.

In trying to give the emblematic character the origin story he

deserves, “Joker” gets lost in the complexities of Arthur’s personal adversities and the disastrous state of Gotham City.

Though the film tries to be ingenious in its shifts of focus from Arthur’s harrowing reality to his fanciful dreams and the greater tribulations in Gotham, the film results in a chaotic overlap of all these storylines that leaves us wondering what was real and what was illusory about Arthur’s conversion into the Clown Prince of Crime.

That being said, this confusion, too, could be a deliberate attempt

by Phillips to save some of the mystery that characterizes the Joker.

Warner Bros. could now easily play off of this uncertainty to keep fans interested and create a franchise with the iconic villain at the helm.

They could claim to have satisfied the devoted fans who so eagerly wanted a solo Joker film, while still keeping us all in the dark about the reality of the nihilistic clown. It could all be a delusion.

Still, this larger plan seems highly unlikely — conspiracy theory-level unlikely. This film intertwines Arthur’s transformation into the Joker with the character development of his antithesis,

Bruce Wayne. It is doubtful that “Joker” intentionally confused us, especially when the film’s plotline directly affects the lucrative Batman franchise.

What is more likely is that Phillips and the studio spread themselves too thin on a story that covered many issues but resolved none of them.

Even with all of the film’s controversy aside, by the end of “Joker,” we are left questioning the point of a movie which focuses relentlessly on a character’s painful social isolation and resulting demonic violence, a movie which culminates in total anarchy where the equally rejected unite and rally behind the murderous protagonist.

It is unclear what the film’s final message is. It almost feels like Phillips was preoccupied with the aesthetics (which are admittedly effective in creating the dark mood of the entire film) rather than focusing on how exactly to tell this origin story that’s never been told before.

“Joker” attempts to be provocative, edgy, raw and real — but not even Phoenix’s incredible acting can save the film from utterly confusing its audience.

Sports Football Drops Perfect Record With Loss to Middlebury Cale Clinton ’20 Staff Writer

The football team’s first-ever Pride Game did not disappoint, as attendees at Pratt Field saw one of the most exciting games in the stadium’s history. The Mammoths hosted Middlebury in a battle of the last two undefeated teams in the NESCAC. Despite the heartbreaking 34-31 loss in double overtime, Amherst has a lot to be proud of with this game.

The game ended in a nailbiter, althought it was anything but close to start. The only way to start a comeback is by first digging yourself into a hole, and the Mammoths managed to do just that in the first 11 minutes of competition on Saturday. After winning the opening coin toss and taking the ball to start the game, Amherst’s first three drives ended in interception, punt and interception, respectively.

The inability to get the offense going early, led to three quick scores for Middlebury, setting the Mammoths up with a 21-0 deficit. The two interceptions by quarterback Ollie Eberth ’20 set up the Panthers’ offense at midfield or better on two drives, and despite a punt pinning Middlebury at their own 11-yard line, two runs amassing a combined 62 yards negated any field position advantages.

In fact, each of Middlebury’s three early touchdown drives contained a play that gained at least 30 yards. For the rest of the game, Amherst’s defense would allow only one play longer than 17 yards: the 54-yard touchdown that would eventually send this game to overtime.

What happened during the 42 minutes between Middlebury’s third and fourth touchdowns was hard-nosed football from Amherst. After one more drive-ending punt, Eberth led a 10-play, 79-yard touchdown

drive that included an impressive 31-yard completion to wideout James O’Regan ’20. A missed point after would make it 21-6 with lots of time on the clock.

While that first touchdown was Amherst’s only score of the half, the Mammoths continued to play with an admirable aggression until the half ’s end.

One such play came after Eberth missed a pass on third-and-5 at Middlebury’s 19-yard line to set up fourth down late in the second. Instead of settling for a field goal, Amherst was confident enough to turn to Eberth again and go for six points. While his pass fell incomplete, that win-atall-costs mindset is the kind necessary to win tight football games like this one. A forced fumble recovery by the Mammoths defense nearly set the offense up for another quick opportunity, but Amherst’s third interception of the afternoon iced the game going into halftime.

After the Amherst defense forced a quick three-and-out to start the half, the offense answered with Eberth’s second touchdown pass of the day — this one to Luke Mallette ’20.

Amherst’s aggression showed again when the offense trotted back out in lieu of the field goal unit. Eberth reconnected with Mallette to capitalize on the twopoint conversion, making it 2114 in favor of Middlebury.

Despite four costly big-gain plays, the Amherst defense deserves a lot of credit for keeping the Mammoths in this game. After going down 21-0, the Mammoths then forced four punts (three of those being three-andouts) and a fumble recovery.

Middlebury began to regain their composure following Amherst’s second touchdown. After driving the ball from their own 25 to the Amherst 11, the Mammoth defense finally got a stop to force a 28-yard field goal. The wouldbe chip shot for three points was

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

After making several key mistakes early on in the game, the Mammoths’ defense held Middlebury to just 13 points in the final three quarters and two overtimes. quickly dashed as Flynn McGilvray ’22 rushed through to block the kick.

After another stalled drive on offense, the Amherst defense answered with a strip-sack on third-and-10 to set the Mammoths up on offense at the Middlebury 32-yard line. It only took five plays from there to set up a goal line rush by Brandon Huff ’22, which tied the game at 21.

Middlebury seemed to be sputtering. Their next play on offense started with an illegal formation penalty. Then, on first-and-15 at their own 20yard line, Middlebury threw another interception, this time to Matt Durborow ’21. This set up a nine-play, 31-yard touchdown drive for Amherst, capped off with a 2-yard rushing score by Kellen Field ’21.

The Mammoths had scored 28 unanswered points to take their first lead of the afternoon, 28-21.

However, this isn’t where the story ends. Both teams would have offensive drives stall out before Middlebury had a 54yard passing score, meaning

another big play had spoiled an otherwise special defensive effort. Despite the back-breaking score, this team didn’t come so far just to surrender this easily.

With three minutes left to play, Middlebury had the ball at their own 12.

In just nine plays, the Panthers had flipped the field and held the ball at Amherst’s 10yard line with just 33 seconds on the clock. After a called timeout

by Amherst, John Ballard ’20 kept the Mammoths’ hopes of victory alive with a goal-line interception, forcing overtime.

The first overtime seemed to continue the themes of defensive dominance and offensive miscues seen by both teams during regulation, as both teams threw interceptions on their first attempts. Durborow notched his second pick of the day, while Eberth lobbed up his fourth turnover after attacking Middlebury’s endzone on third-and-10.

Amherst’s first points of overtime came after a stalled drive ended in a 31-yard field goal

by Conor Kennelly ’22. Unfortunately, that field goal would

be quickly trumped by a Middlebury touchdown, ending the game at 34-31.

The Mammoths, on paper, should not have been in this football game. Middlebury held a 469-367 advantage in total yards, forced four interceptions and jumped out to a 21-0 lead in the first quarter.

Any one of those things would spell disaster for a team, let alone all three at once. That’s why we don’t play football on paper. Despite this being Amherst’s first loss of the season, it was arguably their most impressive game of the season as well. The statistics and analytics that allow us to interpret this game can only explain so much. The pregame preparation and in-game adjustments can only go so far.

What can’t be taught are intangibles, like heart and a refusal to quit. Have those, and you’ll be able to stay in any game. While the road to a NESCAC title now involves a few extra moving parts, there’s a lot to hang your hat on with this loss.

The Mammoths host Bowdoin Saturday on at 1 p.m.

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

Sports 14

Amherst Remains Unblemished, Beats Wesleyan

Jack Dove ’23 Staff Writer

Another multi-goal day from German Giammattei ’21, along with the usual physical Amherst defense proved too much for Wesleyan. Amherst defeated the Cardinals 2-0 on Saturday at Hitchcock Field.

Amherst entered the contest 7-0-2, coming off of Wednesday’s 4-1 defeat of New England College.

That same Wednesday, Wesleyan took on first-ranked Tufts, playing them to a 1-1 double-overtime tie and ending the Jumbos’ seven-game winning streak.

The NESCAC clash kicked off just after noon with no clouds in the sky and over 200 fans in attendance.

The Mammoths dominated possession for the first 10 minutes, led from the back by tight marking and tough tackling from centerbacks Felix Wu ’21 and Kyle Kelly ’21. Forward Ada Okorogheye ’23 excited the crowd with three imposing early runs at goal, but Amherst came away with no goals to show for his efforts.

Substitute midfielder Ignacio

Cubeddu ’23 entered in the 25th minute and opened up the field for Amherst with quick control and distribution at the top of the midfield triangle.

The midfield, led by Cutler Coleman ’20, maintained a high level of pressure and kept the ball moving.

“Cutler is our heart and soul,” said head coach Justin Serpone.

“He’s a total winner. His work rate on both sides of the ball is as good as any kid I’ve ever coached. He’s as important of a player to any team as there is on any team in the country.”

Goalkeeper Bernie White ’22 made one of his seven saves midway through the first half when Wesleyan forward Mason Davisson split two defenders and dribbled through the left side of the box.

White confidently parried Davisson’s shot and maintained the 0-0 score.

After several fruitless attacks, the Amherst offense finally got on the scoreboard, courtesy of Giammattei. In the 41st minute, Giammattei slipped through a few Wesleyan centerbacks with an incisive dribble, and was then taken down about five yards from the goal.

Amherst’s leading scorer smashed his subsequent penalty kick into the bottom left corner, giving the Mammoths a 1-0 lead.

Just after halftime, Giammattei continued his goal-scoring magic and sealed the game for Amherst.

In the 54th minute, Nico Kenary ’22 launched a beautiful diagonal ball over the Wesleyan backline; Giammattei skied Wesleyan goalkeeper Liam Devanny to flick home a header, making the score 2-0 in favor of the Mammoths.

Giammattei’s second score of the game was his 12th NESCAC goal of the season, making him the leading NESCAC scorer so far.

The sophomore from Pinecrest, Florida, is now tied for third in DIII soccer goal-scoring.

When asked about this feat, Giammattei deflected the praise: “It’s nice, but honestly I couldn’t do it without my teammates. It’s more of a team effort.”

White deflected a powerful Cardinal header off of a corner, which seemed to be one of Wesleyan’s biggest chances to get back into the game. White and the rest of the Amherst defense kept Wesleyan at bay for the remainder of the contest

to maintain the shutout. The masterful defensive effort added a sixth shutout in 10 games for the Mammoths.

With the key conference win, nationally-ranked Amherst’s record moves to 8-0-2 and 4-0-2 in league play, good for first place in the NESCAC. Wesleyan dropped to 4-2-3 overall and 1-2-3 in the NESCAC, lowering them to eighth place.

Amherst’s next game is a home

clash on Hitchcock Field with Tufts on Saturday, Oct. 12, at 2:30 p.m.

The battle between the top two teams in the NESCAC and DIII soccer is much anticipated, but to Serpone, it’s just another game.

“To be honest, I haven’t even thought about Tufts yet,” said Serpone. “It’s going to take our maximum effort in each area of the game. It’s not too often that you have No. 1 and No. 2 playing in a regular season game.”

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

German Giammettei ’22 currently holds the third position on the DIII scoring charts with 12 goals.

The Roundup: All the Stuff You Missed In Sports This Week Volleyball: Amherst won both of its matches this weekend in straight sets. On Friday, the Firedogs smashed UMass Boston. The Beacons only came within six points of Amherst in the first set — otherwise the Firedogs were untouchable. Jamie Dailey ’21 had a team-high 12 kills and .259 hitting percentage over the match. On Saturday, Amherst traveled to Hartford to face Trinity in a NESCAC matchup, which the Firedogs handled with ease, keeping their perfect record in the NESCAC. Emily Kolsky ’20 had 15 kills and 12 assists in the team’s victory. Amherst next faced Westfield State on Tuesday night, sweeping their competition in straight sets, 3-0.

Women’s Tennis: Amherst took down Williams in a home contest on Saturday, sweeping the Ephs in both singles and doubles matches, a truly impressive feat. Amherst only lost five of 72 games in singles, and failed to drop a single set. Amherst also impressed in doubles play, but won by much narrower margins. The Mammoths return to action next weekend when they travel to the prestigious

New England Intercollegiate Tennis Tournament.

Men’s Cross Country: At the Paul Short Invitational, Amherst paced the field and finished 36th out of 45 teams in the Gold Division, which included top teams from across NCAA cross country’s three divisions. Spencer Ferguson-Dryden ’20 topped the Mammoths’ harriers, finishing with a sub-five-minute average mile time over the 8K race.

Jamie Mazzola ’21 finished 15 seconds behind Ferguson-Dryden to finish in the top 200 runners. Amherst will take fall break off and then return to action at the Connecticut College Invitational at Harkness Memorial Park in New London, Connecticut.

Women’s Cross Country: Amherst impressed at the Paul Short Invitational this weekend, finishing 20th out of 44 teams against DI, DII and DIII competition. Sarah Gayer ’21 smashed her personal best race by over a minute to finish 21st overall. Sophia Wolmer ’23 shaved two minutes off her record 6K time to finish 78th overall. In total, the squad

posted an average 6K time of 22:41, which led them to great success at a pivotal moment in the season.

Women’s Soccer: Amherst celebrated 40 years of women’s soccer at the college and hosted a stalemate against Little Three foe Wesleyan. Amherst had several opportunities to eke out a victory over the Cardinals, but unfortunately they were unsuccessful. Antonia Tammaro ’21 held down the fort in net for the Mammoths, thwarting several promising Wesleyan opportunities with ease. With the tie, Amherst moves to 2-2-1 in the NESCAC. On Sunday, playing through the damp weather, the Mammoths trounced Wentworth Institute of Technology, 5-0. Amherst scored two in the first half, with junior Hannah Gustafson’s effort standing out. The midfielder cranked the ball in the top corner on a majestic first-touch shot to score her first collegiate goal. In the second half, Amherst put on the pressure and nabbed three more goals.

Ruby Hastie ’22, Sasha Savistsky ’20 and Erin McClave ’20 each tallied a score in the second half, and Amherst walked away with another clean sheet.

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

Women’s Golf Takes Second Place at Williams Invitational Connor Haugh ’21 Managing Sports Editor This weekend, the women’s golf team traveled up north to the Berkshires to compete in the Williams Invitational against top talent from the NESCAC and the region. Surrounded by the picturesque Taconic Mountains, Amherst battled two squads of Ephs, perennial powerhouses Wellesley College and other players in a team event.

Like most of the team’s fall competitions, the Williams Invitational was a two-day event.

Isabelle Ouyang ’21 finished day one in high spirits, as the junior carded a 77, a solid score that left her tied for third in individual scoring. Captain Morgan Yurosek ’20 finished two strokes behind Ouyang, while India Gaume ’22 came in a stroke behind Yurosek on day one. Mina Lee ’22 finished with 82 strokes, one of her best performances of the season, and Janelle Jin ’23 carded an 87 in her first competitive round of 18 at Taconic Golf Club.

After an impressive first round, the team stood in solid position. Amherst sat in third place, behind Wellesley and Williams. Three strokes, however, separated Amherst from Williams’ second team of five, which performed well because of their familiarity with the course. The second Williams team would drop from fourth to fifth after

their home-course advantage disappeared on day two.

Sunday saw a momentous effort from Yurosek. The senior, in her penultimate fall tournament, turned up the intensity and shot a stroke under par for the course of 72. The senior carded the best round of any player in the tournament, for a two-day total of 151, a performance solid enough to earn her a half-share of the individual title, despite being five strokes behind in the title hunt after day one.

The rest of the Amherst squad also played well on day two. Jin improved her score by 13 strokes, finishing with a score of 161 over two days. Lee held her score at 82, Ouyang only added a stroke to her impressive round one score and Gaume carded an 84.

With this impressive round, Amherst carded the best round out of any team’s performance at the tournament. The effort, however, left them five strokes behind host and victor Williams.

Among at-large players who were not designated to score for their team, Lily Worden ’19 was at the head of the pack with a two-day score of 168. The myriad of excellent performances, despite the second-place finish, gives Amherst something to look forward to when the team next takes the course for the New York University Invitational next weekend.

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Morgan Yurosek ’20 shot an impressive 72 strokes on day two of the Williams Invitational.

Sports 15

Views from Sparrow’s Nest Matt Sparrow ’21 Columnist Matt Sparrow previews the upcoming American League pennant race in Major League Baseball and gives reasons why he believes each team may still have a chance.

The first week of the MLB postseason is in the books with only two Wild Card teams, one from each league, packing their bags and heading home for the fall. The club from the National League, the Milwaukee Brewers, met their match at the hands of the Washington Nationals. I had noted that the lack of Christian Yelich would ultimately lead to their demise, and it seems more prescient now, given the result. Backup rookie right fielder Trent Grisham muffed a single by AllStar Juan Soto that allowed three runs to score, turning the Brewers’ 3-1 lead into a final 4-3 deficit. Without further ado, it’s time to give one reason why each American League team still in the running will win the World Series, and one reason why they won’t.

ineffectiveness. Other pitchers such as Will Harris, Ryan Pressley and Joe Smith will certainly help the cause, but if something goes wrong in the Astros’ title quest, the bullpen will probably be the root cause.

2. New York Yankees (103-59) Why they will: Offensive depth The Bombers were one of the most explosive offenses in the majors despite a litany of injuries suffered by the team’s stars. Nonetheless, the Yankees seem to have an endless pipeline of unheralded players making a name for themselves, such as Mike Tauchman, Cameron Maybin, Luke Voit and Mike Ford. Their plan is simply to outslug opposing teams, and with their talent and depth, that could very well work.

1. Houston Astros (107-55) Why they will: Trio of aces Despite an offense that boasts the likes of former MVP Jose Altuve, MVP candidate Alex Bregman and likely Rookie of the Year Yordan Alvarez, the Astros’ top three starting pitchers are as deadly as any in baseball history. Justin Verlander has been amazing this season, striking out 300 batters and eclipsing 3,000 for his career. If he doesn’t win the Cy Young Award, that will likely be because his teammate, Gerrit Cole, takes the honor. Cole struck out a ridiculous 326 batters, setting the Astros’ all-time mark. When they added a fellow Cy Young winner in Zack Greinke at the trade deadline, they formed the scariest rotation in all of baseball, and one that they feel confident can lead them to another championship.

Why they won’t: Starting rotation This is the one question mark that has plagued the Yankees for the better part of two seasons: can their incredible offense and shut-down bullpen outweigh their weak rotation? The answer last year was no, and while New York hopes that this year is different, I’m not so sure. Domingo German, their best regular season pitcher, is set to miss the postseason as the MLB continues to investigate domestic violence charges against him. That leaves James Paxton, who averages barely over five innings per start, Masahiro Tanaka, who had an abysmal second-half of the year and Luis Severino, who is still recovering from shoulder problems that bothered him all season. If the Yankees win it all, it won’t be thanks to this unit.

Why they won’t: Bullpen It’s not easy to find a weakness on the Houston roster, so I’ll go something almost every team could improve upon: the bullpen. Their closer, Roberto Osuna, had an excellent season and even led the AL in saves, but he can be streaky, prone to stretches of dominance followed by periods of

3. Minnesota Twins (101-61) Why they will: Home runs Baseball has never seen a home run hitting team quite like the Minnesota Twins. Their 307 homers set an MLB record for most in a season, one more than their American League Division Series opponents, the Yankees. The Twins also set a record by

becoming the first team to have eight players with at least 20 home runs and five players with at least 30 home runs, as Mitch Garver, Miguel Sano, Eddie Rosario, Max Kepler and Nelson Cruz all accomplished the feat. Needless to say, this team can mash.

Why they won’t: Lack of experience It was tempting to say starting rotation, especially after Michael Pineida was suspended for 60 games and forced to miss the postseason. However, what worries me more is the inexperience of this group when it comes to the playoffs. Sure, Marwin Gonzalez was crucial to the Astros World Series victory two years ago and Sergio Romo won three titles with the Giants, but the vast majority of this team hasn’t participated in more than their onegame Wild Card appearance in 2017.

With rookie manager Rocco Baldelli at the helm, every decision he makes will be scrutinized.

4. Tampa Bay Rays (93-69) Why they will: Pitching As a small-market team, it’s often hard to pinpoint exactly what makes the Rays so good. The front office knows how to use their minimal resources to their advantage and get the most out of overlooked players. Tampa’s strongest unit is probably their starting pitching, where the 35-yearold Charlie Morton continues his late-career renaissance alongside the likes of two 26-year-olds: last year’s Cy Young winner Blake Snell and rising star Tyler Glasnow.

Why they won’t: Lack of funds Yes, the Rays are a heartwarming story.

They have the lowest payroll in the entire major leagues at $63 million. That’s about half of the closest remaining playoff team, with the Twins clocking in at $124 million, less than a third of the Yankees at $218 million. Nothing is impossible, but it’s difficult to imagine them getting past teams like the Astros, Yankees and Dodgers.

The Amherst Student • October 9, 2019

Sports 16

Field Hockey Tops Wesleyan in NESCAC Match Tyler Marshall ’21 Staff Writer The field hockey team took on Little Three rival Wesleyan on Oct. 5 in another NESCAC matchup, both teams bringing their 1-4 NESCAC records to Gooding Field.

The Mammoths controlled play from the start, outshooting Wesleyan 7-1 in the first half. However, neither team was able to score in the first 30 minutes of play.

The weather warmed up as the game went along, and so did both teams. Amherst looked like the better team for the entire game and finally broke through late in the third quarter.

The goal came off a corner where a shot by Anna Agathis ’21 was deflected into the back of the net by Franny Daniels ’21. The goal by Daniels was her fifth of the season and tied her with Beth Williamson ’22 for most goals. Agathis recorded her first assist of the season with the goal.

Amherst did not hold the lead for very long, though, as Wesleyan scored less than a minute later to tie the game.

The two teams headed to the fourth quarter tied at 1-1.

Amherst had a great opportunity to take the lead early in the last quarter when they were awarded a penalty stroke after a corner.

But Wesleyan’s goalkeeper made a tremendous save to keep the score knotted at 1-1 and prevent Amherst from grabbing the lead.

The Mammoths did not let this impact their play, however, as they continued to put pressure on the Cardinals.

Amherst was able to grab the lead just a few minutes later when Kiera Alventosa ’21 scored for the second consecutive game.

Alventosa got the ball in front of the goal with no defenders around her and was able to strike it past the goalie to give the Mammoths the lead.

The score remained 2-1 for the rest of the game as Wesleyan was unable to score an equalizing goal. The defense was strong down the stretch as Amherst prevented Wesleyan from scoring in the fourth. In goal, Emile Flamme ’20 recorded two saves for the Mammoths.

The victory for Amherst brought their record to 6-4 overall and 2-4 in NESCAC play. The game was another example of a competitive matchup between NESCAC schools, something we have seen a lot of this fall.

When asked about the intensity of the game, Daniels said, “the best part about playing in the NESCAC is that nothing is ever the same, no game is an easy game.”

“We knew Wesleyan was going to show up with fire after beating Tufts [last week].

And we definitely felt that on the field. But we battled and worked together to get the result we wanted,” she said.

“It was a true team effort.

Every person did what they needed to do, and we supported each other the whole way.”

Playing as a team and staying tough has been a focus for the Mammoths all season, and their hard work was rewarded on Saturday against Wesleyan.

Amherst will be back in action next Saturday, Oct. 12, when they take on Tufts.

It will be senior day for the Mammoths in their final home game of the year.

FRI

SAT

Volleyball vs. Conn. College, 7 p.m.

Field Hockey vs. Tufts, noon

Men’s Soccer vs. Tufts 2:30 p.m.

Women’s Tennis @ New England Intercollegiate Tennis Tournament

Women’s Soccer vs. Tufts, noon

Women’s Tennis @ New England Intercollegiate Tennis Tournament

GAME SCHE DULE

Football vs. Bowdoin, 1 p.m.

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Franny Daniels ’21 scored the first goal of the match on an opportunity after a corner, leading the team to a 2-1 win.

Women’s Golf @ NYU Fall Invitational

Volleyball vs. Wesleyan, 1 p.m.

Photo courtesy of Clarus Studios

Goalie Emilie Flamme ’20 made two saves, including a penalty stroke save, in a tight match.